In
algebraic geometry, an action of a group scheme is a generalization of a
group action to a
group scheme. Precisely, given a group ''S''-scheme ''G'', a left action of ''G'' on an ''S''-scheme ''X'' is an ''S''-morphism
:
such that
* (associativity)
, where
is the group law,
* (unitality)
, where
is the identity section of ''G''.
A right action of ''G'' on ''X'' is defined analogously. A scheme equipped with a left or right action of a group scheme ''G'' is called a ''G''-scheme. An
equivariant morphism between ''G''-schemes is a
morphism of schemes that intertwines the respective ''G''-actions.
More generally, one can also consider (at least some special case of) an action of a
group functor: viewing ''G'' as a functor, an action is given as a natural transformation satisfying the conditions analogous to the above.
[In details, given a group-scheme action , for each morphism , determines a group action ; i.e., the group acts on the set of ''T''-points . Conversely, if for each , there is a group action and if those actions are compatible; i.e., they form a natural transformation, then, by the Yoneda lemma, they determine a group-scheme action .] Alternatively, some authors study group action in the language of a
groupoid; a group-scheme action is then an example of a
groupoid scheme.
Constructs
The usual constructs for a
group action such as orbits generalize to a group-scheme action. Let
be a given group-scheme action as above.
*Given a T-valued point
, the
orbit map is given as
.
*The
orbit of ''x'' is the image of the orbit map
.
*The
stabilizer of ''x'' is the
fiber over
of the map
Problem of constructing a quotient
Unlike a set-theoretic group action, there is no straightforward way to construct a quotient for a group-scheme action. One exception is the case when the action is free, the case of a
principal fiber bundle.
There are several approaches to overcome this difficulty:
*
Level structure - Perhaps the oldest, the approach replaces an object to classify by an object together with a level structure
*
Geometric invariant theory - throw away bad orbits and then take a quotient. The drawback is that there is no canonical way to introduce the notion of "bad orbits"; the notion depends on a choice of
linearization. See also:
categorical quotient,
GIT quotient.
*
Borel construction - this is an approach essentially from algebraic topology; this approach requires one to work with an
infinite-dimensional space.
*Analytic approach, the theory of
Teichmüller space
*
Quotient stack - in a sense, this is the ultimate answer to the problem. Roughly, a "quotient prestack" is the category of orbits and one
stackify
Stackify LLC is an American software company based in Leawood, Kansas
Leawood is a city in Johnson County, Kansas, United States, and is part of the Kansas City metropolitan area. As of the 2020 census, the population of the city was 33,902 ...
(i.e., the introduction of the notion of a torsor) it to get a quotient stack.
Depending on applications, another approach would be to shift the focus away from a space then onto stuff on a space; e.g.,
topos. So the problem shifts from the classification of orbits to that of
equivariant objects.
See also
*
groupoid scheme
*
Sumihiro's theorem In algebraic geometry, Sumihiro's theorem, introduced by , states that a normal algebraic variety with an action of a torus can be covered
Cover or covers may refer to:
Packaging
* Another name for a lid
* Cover (philately), generic term for ...
*
equivariant sheaf
*
Borel fixed-point theorem
References
*
{{algebraic-geometry-stub
Algebraic geometry